Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 37

Professional Studies: Key Skills for Success

Professional Studies B Professional Awareness

HANDBOOK
2012 - 2013

Name:

..

Group: Degree: .. Year: ...

Department: Student No:

THE UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL


ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP

PROFESSIONAL STUDIES B (EFAC 30002) UNIT TIMETABLE 2012 - 13


Programme Director: Dr Mohammed Wanous

Lectures: Monday (11:00am - 12:50pm) Location: Tyndall Lecture Theatre, Physics Department
Asia Pacific Centre for Sustainable Enterprise Prof Malcolm McIntosh Griffith University, Australia University of Bristol Dr Brian Procter Honorary Lecturer

Lecture 1

(Online Lecture Recording) On PS B Blackboard Site Mon Fri


Mon
29 Oct 2 Nov 6 Nov

Corporate Responsibility in a Globalised World Introduction, Sustainable Development

Lecture 2

By 5 pm
Lecture 3 Lecture 4 Lecture 5

Pre-unit Project hand-in


Legal Landscape for Engineers Health & Safety Management & Environmental Law Value Management The Challenges of Sustainable Energy and Transport

Ann Metherall
Chris Jackson John Doidge Chris Strong Dr Brian Procter

Burges Salmon LLP


Rolls-Royce Group plc Chairman, SW branch Inst. of VM

Mon 12 Nov Mon 19 Nov

Mon 26 Nov

Lecture 6

University of Bristol Honorary Lecturer

Fri
Mon

30 Nov 3 Dec

By 5 pm
Lecture 7 Lectures 8&9

Progress Review hand-in


Engineering Opportunities, 21st Century Challenges Intellectual Property & Knowledge Management Peter Bull Dr Helen Norman Dr Brian Procter

Arup, Director University of Bristol

Mon 10 Dec Mon Mon


14 Jan 14 Jan

Online Class feedback: Major Project Example Reports


Lecture 10 Financial Awareness for Engineers II: Financial Strategy

Robert Pyke

Unilever U.K. Finance Director

Mon 25 Feb

By 5 pm

Major Project Final Report hand-in

Contact for this unit: Dr M. Wanous

e-mail: m.wanous@bristol.ac.uk

Blackboard login page: https://www.ole.bris.ac.uk/webapps/login


1

CONTENTS Part 1: Units Outline Why Professional Studies? Outline of Professional Studies B Overview of Unit Assessment Team Joint Agreement Pre-unit Assignment Brief Major Team Project Brief Feedback Policy General Advice on original work and report writing 4 4 6 7 8 12 19 19

Part 2: Lecture Overview Corporate Responsibility in a Globalised World (Online Lecture) Sustainable Development Legal Landscape for Engineers Health & Safety Management & Environmental Law Value Management Challenges of Sustainable Energy and Transport Engineering Opportunities, 21st Century Challenges (outline not available) IP Rights and Knowledge Management Financial Awareness for Engineers II

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Appendices Appendix I: Lecturer profiles Appendix II: Standard front page for the Team Project report Appendix III: How to use Blackboard to submit coursework Appendix IV: Team Conflict Management and Resolution Appendix V: Course overall plan with activities and dates Appendix VI: PS Curriculum Mapping 12-13 Appendix VII: Key contact details 29 31 32 33 34 35 36

Part 1: Unit Outline

Why Professional Studies? "Scientists discover the world that exists; engineers create the world that never was."
(Theodore Von Karman).

Course accreditation PS-B/C builds upon all the PS-A topics and adds more to the subject of Professional Impact and Ethical Conduct. As with PS-A, the programme is structured around the 5 principle Learning Outcomes specified in the latest Engineering Professional Accreditation guidelines, covering the following topic groups: Commercial and Economic Management Techniques Sustainable Development Legal Framework & Health and Safety Professional Impact and Ethical Conduct

Without meeting these requirements, University Engineering programmes WILL NOT be eligible for accreditation. Role and responsibilities Many Engineering projects / products have an enduring impact on their business enterprise, their customers and users, and also within their social, environmental and political context. They may also reflect on the reputation of the Engineering profession. Engineering decisions therefore often embody a degree of ethical consideration and the exercise of broader responsibilities and values, as well as the goal of commercial and reputational success for their organisation and clients. The PS-A/B/C course introduces awareness of the important role of Engineering within commercial business, the legal framework and broader social / environmental / ethical values. A framework visualizing this is shown in Figure 1, with mapping to relevant PS lectures. Transferrable skills for success The Engineering discipline is a foundation for a rewarding career and adding value in many job roles and in many types of industry. However, success in employment and career development depends as much on professional awareness and a set of KEY complementary skills as it does on the chosen Engineering discipline. Therefore the design of the Professional Studies programme has a prime mission to introduce and help develop these highly transferable knowledge and attributes. To this end, the assessment process takes the form of team projects with report and recommendations devised to apply and practise key skills such as: Teamwork and leadership Project and time management Self learning, adding value, creating new knowledge Reporting, Communication and persuasive Recommendations Critical assessment and evaluation

Outline of Professional Studies B The course is aimed at providing insight into the professional engineers personal, organisational, societal and environmental roles and responsibilities. Benefiting from previous years feedback, the course assessment is now wholly based on Team Projects. The assessment takes the form of team topic pre-unit research (Pre-unit Project) and an extended in-depth Team Project (Major Project), with a key stage Progress Review (PR). 4

The Major Project will seek to demonstrate applying the PS B course topics in a real-life case study and, most critically, to add value to the subject. Lecturers include visiting Professionals with a wealth of experience across a range of industries and career histories; lecturer profiles are given in Appendix I. The teaching content includes a high portion of topical case examples, highly relevant findings from previous PS years major project research; and builds a realistic understanding of the most sought after professional attributes.

Legal landscape IP Law HS&E concepts & management Risk management

Corporate Responsibility in a Globalised World Ethics in Engineering

Value management

Sustainable development Engineering Opportunities and 21C Challenges Knowledge Management

Figure1: Visualization of mandatory (legal/compliance), Professional ethical codes, the broader context and future proofing (Mapped to the PS lectures)

Overview of Unit Assessment


The assessment process will be carried out in two parts as follows:

1 - Pre-unit Project (25% of unit mark) - Detailed brief Page 8:


To complete this project, teams (3 5, mostly 4 members) will conduct pre-unit team research into the PS B topics and then summarise their findings in a combined PowerPoint presentation. When time permits, an example of each topic review will be selected and its author invited to present to the class before the relevant PS B lecture. This Project is to assimilate topic awareness, promote collaborative learning and help students improve the dynamic of their team before starting the major team project. This assignment is peer-assessed with academic staff overview.

2 - Major Team Project (75% of unit mark) Detailed brief Page 12:
Each team is to prepare an audit style of report (about 6000 words) of how well a real company is meeting the highest professional standards, considering the following 4 key areas:

Sustainable Development Management Techniques (only considering one of the following options: Value Management; HS&E Management, or Knowledge Management) Legal Responsibilities Professional and Ethical Conduct

The Project is aimed at companies broadly based in the engineering sector; however, teams may choose any company that interests the whole team, provided approval is sought and given by the PS course leader.

Note: Small teams (3 members) need cover only 3 of the above 4 key areas. Progress Review of Major Project (PR):
The team Major Project will be monitored and interim-assessed through a Progress Review, which counts for 25% of its mark and will be assessed by the academic staff according to pre-set criteria (given in Table 4, Page 16). This Progress Review is intended to provide team-specific feedback aimed at benefitting the quality of the final project report. One or two teams may be selected to make a 5-minute presentation about their progress review to the PS B/C class. As the PR is an integral part of the Major Project assessment, if a selected team was not available to make the progress presentation, a mark of zero will apply for this review.

For both of the PR and the final project report, individual team members contribution will be group peer-assessed to share knowledge and encourage student autonomy and higher order thinking and assessment skills. Peer marks will be used as the basis for distributing the academic staff mark (progress review and final joint report) into individual marks. This team activity is designed to promote reflection on how to apply the principles covered in this unit in practice. It will also provide an opportunity to improve essential skills such as researching company performance, problem solving, teamwork and time management.

All assignments will be submitted electronically using Blackboard and scanned using plagiarism software. The overall assessment of PS B is illustrated in Figure 2.

PS Total Mark
Pre-unit Project Weight 25%
Individual Mark (Max 100)

Major Project Weight 75%


Individual Mark (Max 100)

Group Peer Assessment (Out of 100) Presentation Group Peer Assessment (Out of 100) Team Assessment Panel Presentation
Individual Contribution Factors

Team Assessment Panel

Team Project Report Staff Assessment (Out of 100) [Weight 75%]

Progress Review Staff Assessment (Out of 100) [Weight 25%]

Figure 2: Overall Assessment Process Team Joint Agreement


In your first team meeting, you should prepare a joint agreement to cover the following: 1Your teams ground rules to help you complete your assignment successfully. Some examples from previous years: o Help each other when help is required by another team member. o Motivate each other to get things done on time. o Contribute our individual strengths in order to meet deadlines and have a successful team. o Only offer constructive criticism. o Have fun! o 2Planning for and starting the pre-unit element of the coursework including the arrangement of a team meeting to check the completion of individual topic reviews and to prepare for the team peer assessment presentations (refer to Page 8 for details).

Keep a signed hard copy of your team agreement. This will be requested by the PS academic staff in case of any disagreement (that cannot be resolved internally by the team).

Professional Studies B Pre-unit Project Brief

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP


Professional Studies 2012-2013 This project counts for 25% of the PS B mark. As shown on Page 1 of this booklet, the PS B unit will cover the following 10 main topics:
1. Corporate Responsibility in a Globalised World (Online Lecture) 2. Sustainable Development 3. The challenges of Sustainable Energy and Transport 4. Legal Landscape for Engineers 5. Health and Safety Management and Environmental Law 6. Value Management 7. 21st C Engineering Opportunities and Challenges 8. Knowledge Management 9. Intellectual Property Rights 10. Financial Awareness II: Financial Strategy

The Pre-Unit project is to briefly explore these topics ahead of being presented in the course programme (which starts on 29 October 2012). The learning expectations and reading references for each topic in the PS B handbook can be taken as a good starting point. Where possible, value and interest can be added to a subject by including relevant topical news and comments on the role for Engineers. As a team, allocate 2 topics to each team member. Unless your team has five members, you do not have to cover all of the 10 topics. Each individual Topic Review (TR) should be in the form of 3 to 4 PowerPoint slides. A standard template, which includes a Peer Assessment Table on the front slide, can be found in the Pre-unit Project folder in the PS B Blackboard site. Where needed, it is recommended that slide headlines / visuals be expanded through explanatory notes in the Powerpoint Notes field. Individual Topic Reviews (presentations) should be assembled together in one joint presentation, which is to be submitted via Blackboard (See Appendix III), by 2 Nov 2012, after being checked and signed off by all team members. 8

This project is group-peer assessed with academic staff overview. A penalty will apply to the whole team in case of unjustified high peer marks. Prior to submitting the joint presentation, each team must hold a meeting for group peer assessment of individual presentations. In the meeting, each team member presents his/her Topic Reviews to an assessment panel consisting of the remaining members of the same team. As illustrated in Figure 3, the peer assessment panel will use pre-set criteria (Table 1, Page 10) to individually mark presented reviews and then calculate the average mark, which should be provided in the Peer Assessment Table (on the front slide of the submitted joint presentation) as illustrated below. It is recommended that the group assessment of presentations be conducted no later than the week starting 29 October.

Figure 3: Group Peer Assessment process (Pre-unit Project)

Table 1: Pre-unit Peer Assessment Marking Scheme (Digital copy available on Blackboard) Pre-unit Peer Assessment Marking Scheme - PS 12-13 Assessed Team Member: Marker Name:

1- Independently, select the appropriate score:


Covering the key principles of the reviewed topics Relevant material to reviewed topics Helped me to learn a lot about the topics Clarity of presentation Clear structure 10 8 6 4 2 0 Muddled structure 10 8 6 4 2 0 Extraneous material (25%)

15

12

No help to improve my knowledge on the topics (25%)

Clarity of information

10

Confusing information

Professional delivery

Amateur presentation

Demonstration of topic understanding via questions / answers Able to answer all Difficulty in answering questions raised and 25 20 15 10 5 0 questions develop topic expansion in response to questions Added value (e.g. topical news, personal reflection, role for Engineers ...) Included topical news Included personal reflection or new insights on the topics Explores the role for Engineers 10 8 6 4 2 0 No topical news

(25%)

(25%)

No personal reflection on the topics 10 8 6 4 2 0 No example of a role for Engineers

2- Add the selected scores:

(Total Score = .)

3- Calculate the average of Total Scores given by the Team Assessment Panel: (Average Peer Mark = ..)*

* This average peer mark goes into the table on the front slide of your joint presentation.

10

Where time permits in the course programme, a 5-minute Topic Review (TR) will be presented by its author before each main topic lecture (by prior invitation with 2 or 3 days notice). Purpose and learning benefits of the pre-unit element: 1. Engagement with and new insights into key aspects of Professional awareness and responsibilities. 2. Experience of researching and preparing a summary presentation of key points for non-technical topics relevant to practicing Professional Engineers. 3. Presentation experience by all individuals to small groups within their team, and for some the experience of presenting to a large audience. 4. Development and practice of Project and Team Management skills. 5. Exercising critical judgement through peer assessment and evaluating each others work. 6. Preparedness for a more open dialogue and awareness for each of the main lecture topics. 7. Exploring the teams expectation of what they hope to learn from the unit. This will be taken into account to review the unit content year after year. Summary 1. Hold a team meeting as soon as possible after receiving this assignment brief. 2. Allocate 2 topics to each team member as you see suitable. Do not worry if you have not got enough members to cover all topics. 3. Agree a deadline for the completion of individual topic reviews and for holding a meeting for general preparation for your team peer assessment presentations. 4. Individually, complete your allocated topic reviews as PowerPoint presentations (around 3-4 slide for each topic) using the provided template by the agreed deadline. 5. Hold your team assessment presentations (no later than week starting 29 Oct). 6. Assemble all individual presentations into one joint presentation. 7. Record the average individual peer mark and topics in the Peer Assessment Table on the front slide of the joint presentation. 8. All team members should approve the final joint presentation, including peer marks awarded and keep personal copies before submission. 9. Submit your joint presentation via Blackboard by 2 Nov 2012.

11

Professional Studies B Major Team Project Brief

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP


Professional Studies 2012 - 2013 This assignment counts for 75% of the PS B mark Assume the role of being asked by a reputable engineering sector* company to prepare an audit style report of how well it is meeting the highest standards in its professional responsibilities. Working as a team prepare a critical review with recommendations about your chosen companys Professional Activities, dealing with the following 4 key areas: a- Sustainable Development (Consider company policy and actuality, annual reports, performance trends over time, bench mark against similar companies in the same sector, case study examples, new approaches) b- Management Techniques (Only consider one of the following options: Value Management; HS&E Management or Knowledge Management) c- Legal Responsibilities (Consider Legal aspects of HS&E, Employment, Contracts, Product and Professional liability, possible case examples) d- Professional and Ethical Conduct (Consider Corporate Social Responsibility-CSR handling of wider Local, Community & World issues) Note: Small teams (of three members) need address only 3 of the above 4 key areas. Prepare a joint report (totalling around 6,000 words). Where possible, use relevant diagrams, graphs, and tables to illustrate the points being made. The following are NOT INCLUDED in the word count: Titles, Contents Summary, Headings, Tabular data, References, all Appendices.
* The Project is aimed at companies broadly based in the engineering sector. However, teams may choose any company that interests the whole team, provided approval is sought and given by the PS-BC course leader. Much information will be available in the public domain; such as company websites, annual reports, product literature, advertising, exhibition presence, news coverage, financial analyses. These sources represent the public image of the subject company.

Should you use resources that are not your own then you must reference them within your work and create a bibliography at the end of your report. Details on how to do this can be found in the Queens Building Librarys Writing References leaflet: http://www.bris.ac.uk/is/library/subjects/engfac/writingreferences

12

Important Notes: o The team Major Project will be monitored and interim-assessed through a Progress Review (PR, to be submitted by 1 Dec 2012), which counts for 25% of its mark and will be assessed by the academic staff according to pre-set criteria (Table 4, Page 16). If time permits one or two teams will be selected to make a 5-minute presentation about their progress to the PS-BC class on 3 Dec 2012. The working plan of this progress review is outlined in Page 16. o Before submitting the PR and the joint project report, each team must hold a meeting for group peer assessment of individual contributions. In the meeting, each team member outlines his/her contribution. The remaining members of the same team will act as the assessment panel. o The Progress Review and completed Major Project are to be peer assessed as illustrated in Figure 4, using the standard marking scheme (shown in Table 2) to individually mark presented accounts of individual contributions and then calculate the average individual mark. These marks should be recorded in the Peer Assessment Table (on the front page of the team report). It is recommended that group meeting for the peer assessment of individual contributions in the Team Project is held between 20 and 25 February 2013 (if not held earlier). o All team members should approve the final joint report, including the peer marks awarded. It is the responsibility of each team member to obtain his/her copy of the final joint report including assigned individual contribution scores before submitting it. Only one team member should submit the joint report on behalf of his/her team. o The completed report must be submitted as a Word attachment via Blackboard (see Appendix III) by: 5pm on 25 February 2013. When submitting your team report, please use the standard front page shown in Appendix I, (also available as a digital copy on the PS B Blackboard site). o As the report is intended to be of potential benefit to the subject company, it is recommended that you contact the company to seek their co-operation to learn more, possibly by making a visit or interviewing key personnel or having telephone or email correspondence. o Those who already work with a company and are known to their organization may be able to make this project a part of your work within the company. 13

Figure 4: Group Peer Assessment process (PR and Major Team Project)
Table 2: Peer Assessment and Recognition of Individual Contributions in the Major Project (digital copy will be available on Blackboard, Major Project folder)

2- Add the selected scores to get the Overall Score 3- Calculate the average* of Overall Scores given by the Team Assessment Panel 4- Enter this average peer mark into the table on the front page of the joint article (/ on the front slide of the Progress Review presentation see Page17).

14

Further guidance for the assessment and recognition of individual contributions at the Progress Review, is given on Page 17, Working Plan.

Submitted team reports will be marked by the PS academic team according to standard criteria shown below in Table 3. This will count for 75% of the Major Project mark.

Table 3: Standard Staff Assessment Criteria for Marking the Major Team Project Report:
Max Mark Mark

Structure and Overall Quality


o Table of content, introduction and executive summary. o Use of headings, clear division of subject sections and logical flow o Use of relevant illustrations and tables with appropriate labels o Clarity and conciseness of language used and ideas expressed o Reference list (essential) and Appendices (if needed) 5 5 5 5 5 20 15 10

Content & Subject Knowledge


o Demonstrate subject comprehension o Develop the practical application of the subject o Logical conclusions and persuasive recommendations, substantiated by the body of the report

Added Value
o Extending the subject beyond the lecture material: e.g. by researching additional material, references. o Informative: Enriches the readers knowledge of the subject. o Developing new ideas, examples, methodologies, philosophy, solutions or recommendations. 10 10 10

Total

100

15

Progress Review for the Major Team Project


Team forming, project generic plan, process for selecting a candidate company the selected candidate company profile - the information gathering plan - further topic research and expansion beyond the lecture content to add value and enrich the readers knowledge any interim analysis of company performance - progress made so far possible added value through innovative solutions, applying new methodologies - what worked well, and any lessons learned.

The Major Project will be monitored and interim-assessed through a Progress Review to be submitted by 30 Nov 2012, which is aimed at: a) Guiding the pace and progress of the team project; b) Recognition of individual contributions and providing early intra-team peer feedback on possible teamworking issues. c) Providing staff formative feedback aimed at benefitting the quality of the final report. d) Providing an opportunity for some presentation practice and collaborative learning.

As mentioned earlier, the teams Progress Review will count for 25% of the Team Project mark, and will be assessed by academic staff according to the criteria given below in Table 4.

Table 4: Progress Review Staff Assessment Criteria: Assessment Criteria Intra-team meeting plan & communication arrangements Project overall plan including distribution of responsibilities Actual progress against plan Process for company selection & initial assessment highlights Draft report structure and headings Evidence of extra learning and added value Lessons learned so far from managing the project TOTAL
Max Mark

Mark

10 20 10 10 10 30 10 100

A reminder: One or two teams may be randomly selected to make a 5-minute presentation on their PR to the PS B/C class on the 3 December 2012.

16

Working Plan for the Progress Review:


1) Prepare and submit a joint Powerpoint presentation in 2 parts;

Part a) Max 5 slides by the whole team covering the following: o As a team agree a plan for how to tackle the Team Project, e.g. distribution of tasks, leadership, milestones and timings, regular progress checks, intra-team communication, and a meeting plan with dates and venue. o Allow a cushion of time to handle overruns and the unexpected. o Agree how to select the target company and set a deadline for the decision. Research the choices of possible subject companies. Aim to select a company which has a rich source of public information and with whom you may possibly develop (or with whom you may already have) good personal contact. Perhaps produce a positive attribute checklist to help select amongst a choice of candidate companies and to facilitate team agreement (Group Decision Making). o Prepare a company profile. o Agree the draft structure & headings of your report; gather expanded topic research and information about the selected company. o Consider best practice benchmarking and case studies as a source of critiquing the companys actual performance. o Consider innovative methodologies and solutions, and added value for the reader/target company. o Important: Comment on how well your team is working together. Raise any issues related to individual contribution and briefly outline your plan of how these issues are to be resolved within the team. Appendix IV shows a recommended procedure for Conflict Management & Resolution. If team issues are not resolved by following this procedure, you are strongly advised to request a meeting with Dr Procter or Dr Wanous to discuss possible solutions.

Part b) Max 2 slides by each team member: to summarise his/her actual progress and contribution in relation to the agreed overall team plan and the assigned tasks. Where needed, it is recommended that slide headlines / visuals be expanded through explanatory notes in the Powerpoint Notes field. The slides-with-notes will act as a type of arms length poster presentation of the teams project findings, initiatives, progress and team working. 17

2) Complete an interim assessment of Individual Contribution: Each team member will present his/her 2 individual Progress Review slides (mentioned above) to the rest of the team to enable them to give feedback and recognise the contribution made based on the criteria shown in Table 2. An electronic copy of this peer marking scheme will be available from the PS B Blackboard site, Major Project folder).
Provide the AVERAGE peer marks on the front slide of your Progress Review presentation. A template slide will be available on Blackboard.

Major Project Objectives and Personal Benefits:

The project is intended to achieve the following personal learning and PS course benefits:

o Active application of the PS B topics, with scope to research new material, which extends the subject.

o Exposure to a stretch goal project, in which the soft project boundaries allow teams and individuals to discover new personal potential and to achieve exceptional added value for themselves and their employer. For example, by developing and proposing new philosophies / methodologies or recommending new solutions.

o The completed reports are also intended to provide new Case Study material for future PS and Engineering courses, thus enabling students to contribute real value to future students and teachers on a rolling year on year basis. The data banked from the 2010 -11 Assignments has already been used to enhance the 2012 -12 course content.

o It is expected that students will engage with professional practice in a way, which will positively contribute to success with job interviews and early career development. The assignment also provides a further opportunity to practice presentation and influencing skills.

Students will also learn about their subject company (its mission and policies, current business challenges, management practices, areas of professional excellence and opportunities for improvement). The topic works across an important axis which many companies have insufficient time and resources to focus on, and therefore has the potential to add genuine value for the company. 18

Feedback Policy
Formative feedback will be given on the following assessment activities: a) Pre-unit class feedback 5 Nov: presentation before the lecture. In addition, when time permits, an example of each topic review will be presented by its author before the relevant lecture throughout the course. b) Progress Review class feedback 3 Dec: general class feedback presentation. In addition 1 or 2 progress review examples may be presented by the authoring teams. c) Progress Review Team Specific feedback during Winter break up to 14 Jan: staff assessed feedback delivered via e-mail at team level aimed at benefitting the teams Major Project quality. d) Major Project examples class feedback 14 Jan: presentation before the lecture feedback in the form of selected Major Project example content from previous years. e) Overall feedback: Around end-April 2013 a feedback sheet will be sent to each team by e-mail, with comments on the teams final report, together with provisional individual grades for the whole unit.

Late Coursework Submission Policy a) For work submitted up to 24 hours after the agreed submission deadline, a penalty of ten
marks out of the mark the student would have received applies (e.g. coursework that is marked at 70% would then become 60% once the penalty is applied).

b) For work submitted 2-6 days after the agreed submission deadline, a bare pass will be
given (50% for Level M units, 40% for all other units) OR the original mark less 10%, whichever is lower.

c) Once seven days has elapsed after the submission deadline, the student will receive a
mark of zero. The only exception will be if a student can produce evidence of mitigating circumstances to justify their late submission.

General advice on original work and report writing for Engineers Should you use resources that are not your own then you must reference them within your work and create a bibliography at the end of your case study. Details on how to do this can be found in the Queens Building Librarys Writing References leaflet: http://www.bris.ac.uk/is/library/subjects/engfac/writingreferences Further help and guidance can be found in the Queens Building Library on writing in engineering. See the following page for more detail: http://www.bris.ac.uk/is/library/subjects/engineeringmanagement/finding/quotereferences.h tml

19

Part 2: Lecture Overview

20

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP Professional Studies 2012 - 13


PS B: Professional Awareness Lecture 1 Lecturer Corporate Responsibility in a Globalized World Prof Malcolm McIntosh Organisation Asia Pacific Centre for Sustainable Enterprise Griffith University, Australia Online Lecture Recording (To be made available on Blackboard) Lecture Theme Todays business environment has powerfully reinforced the centrality of responsible management behavior in business. The purpose of this lecture is to give an overview of possible problems and available solutions that (multinational) corporations face nowadays when thinking about how to address social and environmental issues. We will emphasise the role of the UN Global Compact (a public-private partnership initiative promoting responsible corporate conduct), and also discuss the concept of a Sustainable Enterprise and how multinational companies ensure just working conditions in their global supply chains. Learning Objectives Expected Upon completion, students should have an understanding of the key issues in the current debate on corporate responsibility. Students should also be able to differentiate the key benefits and criticisms of the corporate responsibility discourse and understand the limits of the concept. Key References o Rasche, A. (2009): A Necessary Supplement What the United Nations Global Compact Is (Not), in: Business and Society, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp. 511-537 o Scherer, A./G. Palazzo (2008): Globalization and Corporate Social Responsibility, in: A. Crane et al. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 413-430. o Vogel, D. (2010). The private regulation of global corporate conduct: Achievemnts and limitations. Business and Society, 49(1): 69-87. o Zadek, S. (2004): The Path to Corporate Responsibility, in: Harvard Business Review, Vol. 81, No. 12, pp. 125-132. o Online Resources: o http://www.unglobalcompact.org o http://www.globalreporting.org o http://www.sa-intl.org o http://www.ethicaltrade.org o http://www.business-humanrights.org

21

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP


Professional Studies 2012 - 13 PS B: Professional Awareness Lecture 2 Lecturer Date Sustainable Development Dr Brian Procter Organisation 29 October 2012 Time

University of Bristol, Honorary Lecturer 11:00am 12:50 pm

Lecture Theme The lecture builds on the PS-A Introduction to Sustainable Development (SD), which leads to the concept of the Triple Bottom Line (Economic, Social, Environmental drivers). This is taken forward into how companies, markets and Governments are responding, the role for Engineers, and the importance of the whole Product or Projects life cycle. The challenge of creating practical SD performance metrics and a viable business management response will be discussed. Examples of SD inspired new products, and business models will be presented. Learning Objectives Expected Upon completion, students should have a good understanding of: o The importance of Sustainable Development principles o Current national emissions improvement strategies and targets. o The concept of the triple bottom line. o How this is beginning to drive governments, businesses, and the public. o Some models for how these requirements are being tackled within the Engineering Profession. Key References o Institute for European Environment Policy: www.ieep.org.uk o UK Government: www.defra.gov.uk/environment o Forum for the Future: www.forumforthefuture.org.uk o Centre for Sustainable and Environmental Management: www.csem.org.uk o An electronic journal Sustainable Development is available via the Find Journal option on MetaLib: http://metalib.bris.ac.uk/ o Design and Manufacture for Sustainable Development: (Conference Cambridge 3-4 September 2003): Professional Engineering Publishing.

22

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP


Professional Studies 2012 - 13 PS B: Professional Awareness Lecture 3 Lecturer Date Legal Landscape for Engineers Chris Jackson and Organisation Ann Metherall 5 November 2012 Time

Burges Salmon LLB, 11:00am 12:50 pm

Lecture Theme The lecture sets out some of the key ideas in law that will affect a practising engineer in the UK. The aim is not to turn engineers into lawyers but to give some insight into how law impinges on engineering and when and how to make use of specialist legal advice. The lecture will look at the shape of law and how it operates; legal risk civil, criminal and regulatory; and some specific areas of law relevant to engineers: contract, tort, public/administrative law, EU procurement law and health and safety drawing on real life case examples. Learning Objectives Expected Upon completion, students should have an understanding of: o the fundamental principles of the English legal system o why and how it matters for engineers o ways in which law can influence them in their professional lives o key concepts in the specific areas of law identified. Key References o You can find most recent UK statutes and Statutory Instruments on http://www.opsi.gov.uk/stat o European law, and many supporting documents such as consultation papers, can be found on http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/index.html o The UoB Law Librarian has gathered together a number of useful Internet links for you, see the following page for more details: http://www.bris.ac.uk/is/library/subjects/law/info/internetlinks o Find more information on this subject by using Intute at http://www.intute.ac.uk Intute is a free online service providing you with access to the very best Web resources for education and research.

23

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP


Professional Studies 2012 - 13 PS B: Professional Awareness Lecture 4 Lecturer Date Health & Safety Management and Environmental Law Mr John Doidge Organisation Rolls-Royce Group plc 12 Nov 2012 Time 11:00am 12:50 pm

Lecture Theme How modern businesses can achieve compliance with national and international health, safety and environmental law. The session will explore the cost of failure within an organisation and how this can have a detrimental effect on business performance. The importance of addressing HS&E as a risk management issue rather than simply a legal compliance issue will be explored and the positive contribution of good performance will be demonstrated. The management systems approach will be discussed to illustrate how a global company can operate within the varying legal challenges it faces with arguments supported by a number of case studies experienced in recent times. Learning Objectives Expected Upon completion, students should have an understanding of: o The legal framework for health safety and environment within the UK, Europe and World contexts. o An understanding of how management systems can enable business to operate within this complex legal framework. o The tools generally used to assist in the risk management process. Key References o Successful Health and Safety Management HSG 65 Health and Safety Executive Locate the following two standards in the Queens Building Library by using the Library Catalogues Subject search http://www.lib.bris.ac.uk/ALEPH/ Type ISO 14001 into the search box. o ISO 14001 Environmental Management System o BSI OHSAS 18001 Occupational Health and Safety Management System

24

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP


Professional Studies 2012 - 13 PS B: Professional Awareness Lecture 5 Lecturer Value Management Chris Strong Organisation

Date

19 November 2012 Time

Rock Pipit Ltd, and Chairman, SW Branch, Institute of VM 11:00am 12:50 pm

Lecture Theme The lecture introduces the principles of value and group decision-making and shows how these are combined in the theory and practice of Value Management. The application of Value Management, its relationship to quality, risk and cost management will be discussed. A function analysis exercise will be conducted. Learning Objectives Expected Upon completion, students should have an understanding of: o The concept of value and its importance in all engineering disciplines o The dynamics of group decision making and how this is reflected in the processes of Value Management o The definition and fundamental principles of Value Management o Application of Value Management in modern engineering practice Key References o The web site of the Institute of Value Management www.ivm.org.uk o Value Management BS EN 12973:2000 Locate this standard in the Queens Building Library by using the Library Catalogues Subject search http://www.lib.bris.ac.uk/ALEPH/ Type 12973 into the search box Find the location of the following three books via the Library Catalogue: http://www.lib.bris.ac.uk/ALEPH/ o Kelly, J., Male, S. and Graham, D. (2004). Value Management of construction projects. ISBN. 0-632-05143-4. Blackwell. o McGeorge, D. and Palmer, A. (2002). Construction Management. ISBN 0-63206042-5. Balckwell. o Kelly, J, Morledge, R. and Wilkinson (2002). Best Value in Construction. ISBN 0-632-05611-8. Blackwell.

25

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP


Professional Studies 2012 - 13 PS B: Professional Awareness Lecture 6 Lecturer Date The Challenges of Sustainable Energy and Transport Dr Brian Procter Organisation University of Bristol, Honorary Lecturer 26 November 2012 Time 11:00am 12:50 pm

Lecture Theme The lecture focuses on two key aspects of Sustainability Energy and Transport. Projections of energy demand, hydrocarbon energy supply and the scope for renewable and environmentally clean energy options will be discussed. The explosive growth in transport demand represents a key energy, infrastructure and human environmental challenge the recommendations of the latest EU Government White Paper and the UK Government will be reviewed. Examples will be given of engineering innovations and programmes which apply the principles of sustainability. Learning Objectives Expected Upon completion, students should have an understanding of: o The importance of energy requirement in product & project design. o The options for renewable energy alternatives. o The opportunities for new technologies and some key players. o How transport impacts society, business and the environment, and the latest Government strategy. o Transport applications of the hydrogen fuel cell. Key References o UK Government: www.dti.gov.uk/energy/renewables o Renewable Energy World, July August 2002 and 2003. o Renewable Energy Resources, Twidell & Weir. 2005 You can locate this book, and others on this subject, by using the Library Catalogue http://www.lib.bris.ac.uk/ALEPH/ o www.bp.com o Hydrogen fuel cells: www.fuelcelltoday.com o A National Vision of Americas Transition to a Hydrogen Economy to 2030 and Beyond Feb 2002: www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen o Rethinking Hydrogen Cars, D.W.Keith & A.E.Farrell, Vol 301, 302 Science, July 2003: www.sciencemag.org o Future Wheels, Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium. Nov 2000: www.navc.org

26

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP


Professional Studies 2012 - 13 PS B: Professional Awareness Lectures 8 / 9 Lecturers Date Intellectual Property and Knowledge Management Dr. Helen Norman Organisation University of Bristol Dr. Brian Procter 10 December 2012 Time 11:00am 12:50 pm

Lecture Theme The 5 types of IP are described together with their respective strengths / weaknesses, territorial, life and cost characteristics. The requirements for a valid patent and the grounds for prosecution and defence of patents will be reviewed. Patents will be presented as an important source of knowledge (technical and competitive). The treatment of IP as part of a companys Knowledge assets will be discussed. This leads to the broader concept of Knowledge Management as an important emerging business practice, which can be applied to improving the innovation and new product development processes and business performance. If time permits examples will be given of the latest IP analysis techniques and IP activities of leading companies and recent hot technologies. Learning Objectives Expected Upon completion, students should have an understanding of IP rights, the power of IP as a business asset and how organisations seek to manage and leverage their IP and general Knowledge activities. Key References o www.ipo.gov.uk (UK Intellectual Property Office) o www.epo.org (for anything and everything to do with the European patent system) o www.wipo.int (for a good explanation of the PCT system for filing patents internationally) Find the location of the following five books via the Library Catalogue: http://www.lib.bris.ac.uk/ALEPH/ Davis, Intellectual Property, Butterworths, 3rd Ed (2008) Bainbridge, Intellectual Property, Pitman, 7th Ed (2009) Holyoak & Torremans, Intellectual Property, Butterworths, 5th Ed (2008) The Knowledge Creating Company, Ikujiro Nonaka & Hirotaka Takeuchi, Oxford University Press, 1995 o Intellectual Capital The New Wealth of Organizations, Thomas Stewart o o o o

27

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT GROUP


Professional Studies 2012 - 13 PS B: Professional Awareness Lecture 10 Lecturer Date Lecture Theme Following from Part 1 of the Financial Awareness topic, this lecture will provide an overview of how a typical manufacturing company maximises its bottom line profits by applying financial analysis and strategies. Cost control methods, pricing / marketing strategies, and project appraisal techniques will be discussed. An understanding of the principles discussed is essential to the maintenance and growth of a successful business. Learning Objectives Expected Main objectives: o An understanding of different cost categories and strategies a company can adopt to minimise its cost base. o An appreciation of pricing and marketing strategies, and how they can be applied to improve business performance. o How organisations apply financial analysis technique to make decisions. o Key References o Dyson, JR, Accounting for Non-Accounting Students, Financial Times/ Prentice Hall, 8th Edition, ISBN 0273722972
o

Financial Awareness for Engineers II: Financial Strategy Robert Pyke Unilever U.K. Organisation 14 Jan 2013 11:00am 12:50 pm Time

Drury, C, Management Accounting for Business Decisions, Thomson Learning 2003, 2nd. Edition, ISBN 1861527705

28

Appendix I: Lecturer Profiles Brian Procter

Peter Bull

Dr Brian Procter has an Engineering degree and PhD from Glasgow University, followed by over 30 years experience working in SME and large international Engineering and Materials Science companies. He has worked in directorship roles of technology & innovation, project, marketing and general business management. Now working as a visiting lecturer, he is the unit leader for Engineering Professional Studies (PS-B&C) at Bristol University. Brian is an Engineer who understands the important role of technology & innovation in business success; and has a special interest in the challenges posed by sustainability and the opportunities for future Engineers.

Peter is a Director at Arup. He leads their Mechanical and Electrical Services engineering team in Bristol. A chartered engineer, Peter has been designing low energy solutions for a wide variety of building types for over 25 years. He has seen significant change in the role of the building engineer in this period and is looking forward to the industry embracing new technologies and new thinking in the future, to deliver sustainable solutions. Peter has been a Visiting Industrial Professor at the University of Bristol since 2006.

Malcolm McIntosh

Chris Jackson

Professor and Director, Asia Pacific Centre for Sustainable Enterprise, Griffith Business School Brisbane, Australia. He is founder of the international roundtables on Sustainable Enterprise, investigating moves towards a low carbon sustainable enterprise economy for the 21st Century, and runs several partnership programmes with overseas universities. He was a special advisor to the UN Secretary-Generals Global Compact, and has worked on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programmes with many global corporations & institutions (UN, BP, Shell, BBC, Pfizer, ABB, Harvard, UK Government).

Chris Jackson is a Solicitor-Advocate and a partner at Burges Salmon LLP, a leading UK law firm based in Bristol. He is recognised as a leading UK Rail (disputes) lawyer and authority on safety/liability issues - giving evidence to a Select Committee on safety legislation in 2008. He often acts on complex and leading litigation. Ann Metherall and he have - between them - acted on every major Rail UK rail accident since 1995. Chris jointly leads the Burges Salmon legal risk service which (uniquely in the UK market) gives commercial organisations a diagnosis of their legal risk profile civil, criminal and regulatory - and proposes system changes to address them. Chris lectured for the Institute of Directors in London for five years and jointly drafted their course on governance and risk in listed companies.

29

Ann Metherall

Helen Norman

Ann Metherall is a Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers and a partner at Burges Salmon LLP. Dual qualified as a solicitor and Chartered Civil Engineer, her operational experience over ten years of managing rail infrastructure and a large direct workforce (prior to her career in law) brings a high degree of pragmatism to advice. She has wide ranging advocacy experience during inquests and litigation cases in rail and high hazard industries such as construction and chemical. Ann is an experienced speaker on legal and health and safety issues with a distinguished track record in providing training for directors and senior managers.

Dr Helen Norman read law at the University of Birmingham, where she was awarded the degrees of LLB and LLM. She then worked for five years as an in-house lawyer for an international oil company in London, specialising in trade marks, during which time she qualified as a barrister. She has been a Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Bristol since1998. Over the years she has taught primarily commercial and property law subjects to a wide range of undergraduate, postgraduate and postprofessional students. Her principal area of interest is Intellectual Property Law, on which she has written extensively.

Chris Strong

John Doidge BSc CFIOSH

Chris Strong is a Director of Rock Pipit Ltd; a South West based management consultant specialising in commercial Value Management. Chris has clients in a range of sectors and geographical areas. He has provided consultancy services to the University of Bristol since 2006; Rock Pipit has undertaken around 30 Value Management workshops for some of the Universitys most prestigious construction projects. Chris is the Chair of the South West Branch of the Institute of Value Management.

A chartered fellow of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health, John joined Rolls- Royce in 2000 and is currently Head of Health, Safety and Environment for the services sector of the company. Prior to joining Rolls-Royce John was head of Occupational Health and Safety Consultancy for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. Over the 20 years he has been involved in the HS&E arena he has been involved in the investigation of a large number of serious accidents and has presented evidence both in court and at fatal accident enquiries.

30

Appendix II: Standard Front Page for the Team Project Report

Professional Studies B (2012 - 13)

Team Number:

Date/Time of Submission:

Team Leader (name/email address):

Group Peer Assessment Table Name of team members 123456-

Average Peer Mark (A score out of 100)

31

Appendix III How to use Blackboard for coursework submissions 1- Login into Blackboard using your usual university Username and Password (https://www.ole.bris.ac.uk/webapps/login/) 2- Select Professional Studies B from your list of attended courses 3- Click on Submit Coursework

This will take you to the following window 4- Click on the assignment you want to submit

This will take you to a new window.


5. Use the browse button to locate your file to upload and then click on Submit. You will then see a message confirming successful submission, an opportunity to view the document submitted and a date/time stamp. This can be screen printed and saved as proof of receipt.

32

Appendix IV:

Team Conflict Management Policy

33

Appendix V:

Course plan with activities and dates

34

Appendix VI PS Curriculum Mapping 12 - 13

35 35

Appendix VII

Contact Details of the PS Team

Unit Leader:

Dr Brian Procter Civil Engineering Department Engineering Management Group b.t.procter@btinternet.com

PS Programme Director: Dr Mohammed Wanous Civil Engineering Department Engineering Management Group M.Wanous@bristol.ac.uk

Blackboard login page: https://www.ole.bris.ac.uk/webapps/login

Queen's Building Library Based in the Queens Building the Library houses collections of books, print journals, reports, conference proceedings and videos for the Engineering Faculty and Department of Mathematics. Library Contact Details

For subject enquiries contact lib-engineering@bristol.ac.uk

36